Conversation
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
This is a great start on the tests, and you've covered several important cases. However, a couple of adjustments are needed before this can be approved.
Your test for splitInteger(6, 2) currently only checks the length of the result, which doesn't fully validate the output. Please update the assertion to check that the array's content is exactly [3, 3], for example, by using toEqual([3, 3]).
Additionally, the test suite is missing a required case from the task description: splitInteger(17, 4). Please add a test for this scenario to ensure full coverage of the requirements.
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Important
Fix the issues, commit the changes, and then re-request my review using the Re-request review button2 in the Reviewers tab.
Tip
If you have any comments about this review, please leave a message in the Add a comment section below and mention me with the @mateacademy-ai-mentor tag3.
I will read your message during my next review of your pull request. Please do not reply directly to my comments, as that feature is not supported yet.
Caution
Do not close the pull request until the review is complete. Closing it early can lead to unexpected behavior and disrupt the review process.
Footnotes
src/splitInteger.test.js
Outdated
| if a value is divisible by a numberOfParts`, () => { | ||
| const result = splitInteger(6, 2); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(result).toHaveLength(2); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This assertion checks only the length of the resulting array. According to the task requirements, you should verify the exact content of the array, which should be [3, 3] for this test case.
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Excellent work addressing the feedback and ensuring the test suite covers all requirements! Your solution works perfectly, so I am approving it.
I have one small suggestion for future improvement. In src/splitInteger.test.js, two tests share the same description. It's a good practice to give each test a unique name, for example, test('should correctly split 32 into 6 parts'). This helps to quickly identify which specific scenario is failing if a test breaks.
This is just a minor point on best practices. Great job on this task!
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Footnotes
| expect(result).toEqual([4, 4, 4, 5]); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should sort parts ascending if they are not equal', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test has the same description as the one on line 19. It's a good practice to give each test a unique and descriptive name. This helps in quickly identifying which scenario is failing.
For example, you could change this to something like: test('should correctly split 32 into 6 parts').
2 participants
No description provided.